They didn't have a 170 lb division, so and a lot of PRIDEs 183 lbers that moved down to 170 got beat with ease.
Forrest Griffin completely shut down Shogun and Rampage, Wanderlei has probably the worst UFC record other than Leonard Garcia, BJ Penn beat Takanori Gomi when Gomi was at his best and BJ was in his ronin phase, Dan Henderson isn't taking home a UFC belt anytime soon.
Pride definitely had a better heavyweight division, but that was pretty much it. Anderson Silva, Shogun, and Big Nog are really the only HUGE success stories that transitioned from PRIDE to the UFC.

Forrest Griffen got beat up for 2.25 rounds until Shogun gassed. Rampage came over and KOed the UFC's biggest guy...which he also did in Pride. You know where he won the f---ing title.... Dan Henderson has gone on to be the best US born MMA fighter of all time. So yeah he might not be winning a UFC belt at 41 but he did just lose a chance to try due to injury...

The scorecards that matter say he won the fight. I'm not saying there haven't been bad decisions in the past, but Forrest over Rampage wasn't one of them. It was a close fight and Forrest did enough to win.

Absolutely its the greatest MMA promotion ever. Its not about what they did for MMA and bringing it to cable tv or anything. Its about the fights, its about the spectacle, and its about the warriors who put their blood sweat and tears on the line.

Who gives a crap about steroid testing. I am not a fighters moral compas. Thats for the organization to figure out.

I am a fan and I am there to watch fights.

Sure they had less events. That was the nature of the beast during that time. During 2004 to 2006 Pride had 29 shows. Or about 10 a year.

Everyone talks about the fixed fights, and sure that happened some early in pride, but rarely during hte last several years.

I have lived slept and breathed MMA since the late 90's early 2000's. Pride was the far superior product available.

Compared side by side, year by year, yes Pride was better than the UFC back in 1997. The UFC didn't come under Zuffa ownership until 2001 and prior to that was having issues even being able to put cards on PPV. Since Zuffa got the UFC sanctioned, it has been the better product, and far better MMA organization/promotion.

Compared side by side, year by year, yes Pride was better than the UFC back in 1997. The UFC didn't come under Zuffa ownership until 2001 and prior to that was having issues even being able to put cards on PPV. Since Zuffa got the UFC sanctioned, it has been the better product, and far better MMA organization/promotion.

as a guy who went from Pride to UFC, I'm going to say negative to that. Both had good fighters but Pride had the better show, rules, and judging criteria. To this day I STILL don't understand how or why the takedown is worth so much in MMA.

Compared side by side, year by year, yes Pride was better than the UFC back in 1997. The UFC didn't come under Zuffa ownership until 2001 and prior to that was having issues even being able to put cards on PPV. Since Zuffa got the UFC sanctioned, it has been the better product, and far better MMA organization/promotion.

False. I would watch Pride over the UFC from 2003 to 2006. Would easily be my preference even though I would have less shows.

The scorecards that matter say he won the fight. I'm not saying there haven't been bad decisions in the past, but Forrest over Rampage wasn't one of them. It was a close fight and Forrest did enough to win.

Rampage pretty clearly in my book took rounds 1, 3, and 4. Forrest took 10-8 in round 2 and 10-9 in round 5. That makes it a draw.

Rampage pretty clearly in my book took rounds 1, 3, and 4. Forrest took 10-8 in round 2 and 10-9 in round 5. That makes it a draw.

Which rounds did you have for Forrest?

No clue, its been awhile since I've seen the fight. All I know is at the time I had it scored for Griffin and so did the judges. Unfortunately judges don't have the luxury of watching a fight over again so myself going back and watching it is futile. However they scored it at the time, I was ok with it...and so was Rampage. It wasn't until later that he started questioning the decision. Whether it was just with leg kicks or however he did it, Forrest Griffin officially won that fight.

False. I would watch Pride over the UFC from 2003 to 2006. Would easily be my preference even though I would have less shows.

If you like Pride that's fine, but I grew up on the UFC and I like the brand better. Its not really an argument anyone is going to win, its just a preference. At the end of the day though, the UFC bought Pride in 2007 and is still on the air, and still doing amazing things. They must have done something right.

If you like Pride that's fine, but I grew up on the UFC and I like the brand better. Its not really an argument anyone is going to win, its just a preference. At the end of the day though, the UFC bought Pride in 2007 and is still on the air, and still doing amazing things. They must have done something right.

I actually enjoyed all of the Above, like it/dislike it, the UFC was a visionary so to speak. They tweaked the sport enough to satisfy the politicians and took enough of the "Barbarian" aspect away to lure the casual fan who gets a lil squeamish at the site of a soccer kick to the head. Probably saved the sport from fading into obscurity, so however you feel about the old ways they ain't coming back, so enjoy what you got

You can get a vast majority of the Pride's for very cheap because they come in 3-5 event packages. For instance, you can get the first 5 Prides for 17 bucks on Amazon. (Even cheaper if you don't mind used).